Picture this: A student sits in class as their teacher stands up front, conducting a lesson for tomorrow’s upcoming quiz. Yet, instead of taking notes or following along, they whip out their phone, place it under their desk and direct their focus to scrolling through social media. 

At robotics club, one member gets lost in Instagram reels rather than coding. 

Another kid records TikToks during an off period instead of completing their assignment due in an hour. 

Yet in another classroom, a student actively listens and participates during their teacher’s lecture with their phone zipped away in their bag, and will need their phone later to text their mom about pick up time. 

In newspaper class, a staff member records an interview and takes photos using their phone for an investigative report.

Another student with diabetes checks their blood sugar and boluses a dose of insulin after feeling woozy during lecture.

Finally, one student anxiously checks their texts during lunch, waiting for updates from the animal hospital on their dog that’s currently in critical condition.

Amidst decisions forming among state and district policymakers about restricting phone use, is it truly fair to confiscate all these students’ devices?

No. Taking phones away from students will not solve any problems—reaffirming boundaries will.

The Issue:

Colorado’s House Bill 1135, a law passed this year, requires that by July 1, 2026, all school districts within the state must post on their websites a policy concerning communication device use during school hours.

In preparation for the impending July 1 deadline, Douglas County School District (DCSD) hosted two community forums—an in-person one on Nov. 6, and a webinar on Nov. 18—to receive community feedback on the course of action they should take about the phone ban.

Now, a wave of passed bills means a majority of K-12 students will be banned from using their personal devices in school during the 2025-2026 or 2026-2027 school year, with 31 states already executing a ban or planning to do so. The goal of these laws is to improve the mental and social health of students by removing distractions from the classroom entirely. 

Rockmedia attended these forums, and it is clear that there is an overwhelming amount of dissent towards all phone use within the district’s community, but those who are providing the most input lack applicable experience and understanding of how schools function today.

The Strategic Plan survey they presented on the webinar did not survey students at all. Students also did not receive invitations to attend the multiple forums hosted, while parents and faculty did through email.

Undoubtedly, there are differences on how phones should be used at the different age levels, but a district policy or ban also fails to acknowledge these differences in their approach.

At these forums, topics of bell-to-bell bans or faraday-bag-esque solutions were discussed, failing to acknowledge the multifaceted benefits of allowing teachers and students to establish boundaries and create their own policies that fit each course’s unique needs.

Phones are an integral part of our world now. We communicate with our loved ones, we get our news and entertainment, we check our grades and we play our games. There is a balance between leisure and business—one that we need to teach and trust our students to learn.

We make content to share with the world, we learn new information—and yes, we get distracted in class too. 

Despite the prevalent misuse of cell phones, students must have the right to carry and use their phones throughout the day. The more we try to crack down on their use instead of teaching our students how to appropriately use and self-manage their screen time, we ignore each student’s unique circumstances and we rob them of invaluable potential for growth.

Our Opinion:

Policies limiting the use of communication devices during school hours are ineffective in combating concerns of distractions in schools.

Policies and rules will not fix attention spans or cure mental health issues. 

Too much emphasis is being placed on controlling student access to smart phones and smart watches during class time—yet it has not yet been acknowledged that other devices, such as laptops, have the same potential to be just as problematic in a learning setting.

If certain devices are taken away, it is likely that students will consequently adapt to the situation and find other means of entering platforms like social media and messages. 

Banning devices in general is also not a feasible solution, as now in a modern age where technology is a universal tool, school work is primarily completed digitally. 

We need to learn how to adapt to technology and instill confidence in our students to use it responsibly and in moderation on their own, which begins by seeking an alternative to a bell-to-bell phone ban.

High school is the cornerstone of adulthood for teenagers as they learn more than just chemistry and calculus—the lessons they learn behaviorally set the tone for their futures after graduation, and instilling self-management skills in them is extremely important. 

Phones serve as a valuable tool to teach students about integrity and self-control, which are crucial to the development and success of young adults, because placing the control of phone use in their hands allows them to think critically about their use of it and its effects on their academic success. 

High school students affected by the phone ban have adult responsibilities. These students work jobs, drive, vote, pay taxes and take college coursework among other responsibilities—yet we can’t fathom allowing them to manage their own screen time usage? 

Instilling confidence in these students begins with trusting them to make good decisions while informing them of the negative potential effects when not adhered to, and punishments exist if that happens.

Arguments have been made claiming that in the case of an emergency, students should be refrained from having access to communication devices to prevent the spread of false or misleading information, which is a grossly misinformed statement. 

Among multiple mass shootings that have occurred in schools across the country, students have used their phones to bring in first responders to protect their communities. 

According to the investigation update published by Jefferson County Sheriff’s Office about the Evergreen school shooting, the first call to 911 was made exactly 61 seconds after the first shot was fired. Stripping students of their access to phones takes away the potential for them to bring attention to extremely dangerous situations with ease and speed.

Students should have the right to communicate with their parents if they ever feel they are in danger or in need of assistance. Removing that connection is ethically and morally wrong for both the parents and the students. Basic communication platforms at least should remain accessible for the latter.

Phones also carry specific benefits of usage in student media that are aligned with professional standards and allow us to fulfill our responsibilities as our community’s news source with ease. 

Smartphones function as a modern day swiss-army knife, meaning they have every tool we need rolled up into a clean and easy-to-use package for reporters and editors. 

To produce content on the go, we utilize apps like CapCut, Adobe Lightroom and Express, Google Drive and Otter.AI which act as tools to improve our workflows.

Everything we need is located on this device and the cost to replace everything on it is insurmountable for not only our publication, but others in the district and the state who lack the necessary funding to do so. 

On the low end, we would need a minimum of $600 to ensure every student had access to their own audio recording device. Additionally, the cameras on our phones are equal to that of professional cameras. The camera on many modern phones is just as powerful, if not more than the equipment our publication currently has, and replacing these with new cameras will cost upwards of $1500-$2000 per camera. 

While those in favor of a ban argue that unrestricted or regulated use in certain classes decrease the attention that students pay to academics, that isn’t the fault of the phone itself, it’s the fault of the student. 

Even without legal regulations or official policies, there are plenty of frameworks in place within our school regulating phone usage. 

Teachers already often outline strict phone policies in their syllabi at the beginning of the year—their policies are designed to fit individual needs of their class, with tactics like attendance via a phone chart taking prevalence because that is an easy way to relieve a class of that distraction. 

It needs to be up to teachers or departments to decide their own policies about phone usage in their classes instead of full bans or policies that limit their use in school. 

A one-size-fits-all approach barely works for clothing size. Why should it work in a district with over 60,000 students with 60,000 different lives?

Take Action:

At the district forums, Chief of Staff Steve Colella invited community members to share their feedback as the district continues to form policies.

Before we end up with a policy that is complained about, ensure you have done everything in your power to make your voice heard by emailing board members your opinions.

Erin Kane, Superintendent

Email: [email protected]

Steve Colella, Chief of Staff

Email: [email protected]

Brad Geiger, Director – District C

Email: [email protected]